


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 



. c 



Shelf L 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 






THE SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT 



ON THE 



MODE OF BAPTISM 



IN A NUT-SHELL. 



BTT IB. B- CI^IS2vC-A.3iT, ID. 3D,, 
Of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. 







'»* 






ST. LOUIS, MO.: 

Printed for the Author by 
Ryan, Jacks & Co., 602 N. Fourth Street. 

1880. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1880, by 
E. B. Crisman, D. D., in the Office of Librarian of Congress, 
at Washington, D. C. 



Contents. 



CHAPTER I. 

Introduction • . • 5 

CHAPTER II. 

Immersionists — Are they Baptists ? The Issue. • . 9 

CHAPTER III. 
John's Baptism not Christian Baptism. • . • 15 

CHAPTER IV. 
Mode of John's Baptism. . , . 20 

CHAPTER V. 
Christ's Baptism. . . . • • • • 39 

CHAPTER VI. 
Christian Baptism — The Three Thousand. • • 56 

CHAPTER VII. 
Christian Baptism — Samaritans — The Eunuch. . .64 

CHAPTER VIII. 
Christian Baptism — Paul # t 76 

CHAPTER IX. 
Christian Baptism — Cornelius. . . . • • 82 

CHAPTER X. 
Christian Baptism — Lydia — The Jailer. • • • 85 

CHAPTER XI. 
The Greek Word Baptizo ..•••• 92 

CHAPTER XII. 
Design and Use of Baptism — Conclusion. . • 100 



THE MODE OF BAPTISM. 



CHAPTER I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

As introductory to this book, the reader's at- 
tention is asked to the following statements : 

1. This is no exhaustive treatise nor elab- 
orate discussion. It seeks to cover the entire 
field of Scriptural argument by giving simply 
a compendium of the leading heads. It is in- 
tended to aid families and young persons in 
getting, in a nutshell, the true Scriptural doc- 
trine on the subject discussed. Young minis- 
ters will find in it an assistant for their own use 
and one which may be safely, and it is believed 
profitable, put into the hands of intelligent 
young converts who may find themselves vexed 
on this vexacious question. 

2. The author does not claim originality in 
the arguments here given. A great many 
books have been read and arguments from 



6 



MODE OF BAPTISM. 



them freely used. To make a formal acknowl- 
edgement on the many pages where free use 
has been made of the thoughts of others, 
would be to print a great deal of technical 
matter which would be of no service to the 
reader and for which he cares nothing. The 
book used more than all others together was 
the Holy Bible, to which credit is given in 
every instance. 

3. The occasion for sending forth this book 
is the same which Has existed for many genera- 
tions — nothing more, nothing less. Immer- 
sionists, assuming that there can be no contro- 
versy as to the Scriptural mode of baptism, 
have boldly and noisily proceeded to declare 
the remainder of the Christian world without a 
church or church relations, and without the 
requisite qualifications for the sacrament of the 
Lord's Supper. They are doing the same 
thing yet. This book, therefore, is put forth on 
the ground of self-defence, as are many others 
of a similar kind. Paedobaptist ministers feel 
that they have more important and welcome 
messages to deliver from the pulpit than fre- 
quent discussions on this non-essential; but as 



INTRODUCTION. 7 

their silence is misconstrued by their noisy op- 
ponents, they deem it best to put their defence 
and arguments in handy books which the intel- 
ligent and pious may quietly and prayerfully 
read. 

4. This book has no proselyting design and 
the reader, whoever he or she may be, is here- 
by kindly requested not so to use it. Many 
Immersionists compass sea and land to make 
one convert to their mode ; indeed it seems 
that some of them will labor more and make 
more sacrifice to accomplish this than to con- 
vert a sinner from the error of his way and 
save a soul from hell ; and will exult more over 
the proselyte than over the convert. But we 
beg our readers to have a higher and holier 
aim. Read for information and use that for 
spiritual comfort, for usefulness, and for 
heavenly and eternal exultation and triumph. 
And may the Lord help you. 

5. This is not intended to be either a learned 
or a critical discussion. If any critic should 
wish to criticise the language, rhetoric or logic 
of this book, or any Immersionist essay to reply 
to it, let him criticise and reply. The author's 



O MODE OF BAPTISM. 

time and attention are otherwise employed, 
and such 'persons will receive no notice from 
him. His work is done when the book is pre- 
pared and circulated. It is supposed to be able 
to defend itself. 



IMMERSIONISTS. 



CHAPTER II. 

IMMERSIONISTS — ARE THEY BAPTISTS? THE 

ISSUE. 

I. Defined. Immersionists are those Christ- 
ians who practice the mode of water baptism 
defined by Alexander Campbell in these words : 
" We must dip only once, and the motion must 
be backwards!' Three things are declared es- 
sential : 1st. Dipping. 2nd. Only one motion, or 
dipping. 3rd. This motion must be backwards, 
or face up. On this definition of what they 
erroneously claim to be the Scriptural water 
baptism, we understand the so called Baptist 
churches all to agree. This definition requires 
that the subject be applied to the water, instead 
of the water to the subject — and that in a 
method with prescribed details as above. 

The Greek Church maintain that the subject 
must be plunged three times, and after these 
three immersions must be sprinkled with water. 
They have two of the prescribed essentials, viz : 
the dipping, and the backward motion; but not 



IO MODE OF BAPTISM. 

the " only once!' And besides, they sprinkle. 
Of course, then the Greek Church cannot be 
classed with Immersionists. 

The Dunkards not only insist on a triple im- 
mersion, but also that it be by a fonvard mo- 
tion or face down. Thus they have only one 
of the prescribed essentials, viz : the dipping; 
and are without two, viz : the " only once " and 
the " backzvard" motion. And on the con- 
trary they dip three times and the face down. 
So they too cannot be classed with Immer- 
sionists. 

2. Their Numbers. Of the sixty or seventy 
millions of Protestants of all denominations in 
the world, probably not a fiftieth part have been 
baptized by immersion. Dr. Kurtz, of the 
Lutherian Church, a careful author, says, 
" probably not one-sixtieth part practice sub- 
mersion." The proportion of the Christian 
world, who practice immersion, is very small. 
This is mentioned for information ; not as an 
argument. 

3. Their Assumptions. They claim : First, 
that immersion, as above defined, is the Scrip- 
tural and only mode of water baptism. Second- 



IMMERSIONISTS. I I 

ly, that in baptism the mode is the ordinance ; 
and if the mode is altered, the ordinance is abol- 
ished. Thirdly, then all who are not immersed 
are unbaptized. Fourthly, that the unbaptized 
have no rights at the Lord's table ; hence : 
Strict or Close-Communion. Fifthly, that 
there is no Church but an immersing and im- 
mersed Church. Sixthly, the unimmersed are 
living out of the Church and out of the line of 
duty. Seventhly, if out of the Church and the 
line of duty " there is no promise to them." 

4. The Issue. As already stated, Immer- 
sionists hold, first, that in baptism the subject 
is to be applied to the water by being dipped 
into it backwards ; second, that this precise 
mode of its performance is essential to the pres- 
ence of the ordinance; third, that dipping the 
subject into water, or applying him to the wa- 
ter, is the only Scriptural (mode of) baptism. 
On the contrary Psedobaptists as firmly main- 
tain, first, that the precise mode of the perform- 
ance is not essential to the presence or validity 
of the ordinance : second, that applying the 
water to the subject is the Scriptural mode of 
baptism. 



I 2 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

The Cumberland Presbyterian and other 
Presbyterian Confessions of Faith say, " Dip- 
ping of the person into the water is not neces- 
sary ; but baptism is rightly administered by 
pouring, or sprinkling water, upon the person." 
Pres. Con. Faith; Chap, xxvin, Sec. m. 

I am aware that some have erroneously in- 
terpreted this language of the Con. of Faith to 
allow the validity and even the propriety of im- 
mersion and only to claim that the performance 
by affusion is valid baptism. But I understand 
it to be a plain and positive declaration that 
affusion is the right, because the Scriptural, mode 
of baptism, and that immersion is not right. 

Attention is asked to the following remarks 
on the above : 

1. Among the comparatively few Christians 
who advocate submersion there are many con- 
flicting opinions as to the precise mode of its 
performance. Among those who practice sprin- 
kling there are no such conflicting opinions. 

2. The Immersionists — being only, say, the 
one-fiftieth part — boldy unchurch the whole of 
the Christian world besides, their fellow-sub- 
mersionists as well, and strongly intimate to the 



IMMERSIONISTS. 1 3 

other forty-nine-fiftieth part that they have no 
promise of heaven. They must be honest in 
this, or else they would not do what seems to 
the great body of the Christian world arro- 
gant and unreasonable. But their honesty 
certainly must be confined to the interpretation 
of one passage of the Scripture only, viz. : 
" Strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, * 
* &w<\few there be that find it." Matt, vn, 14. 

3. Thus mankind are confronted with the 
spectacle of a very small proportion of the 
Christian world, who, while loudly repudiating 
all written creeds, have adopted an unwritten 
one, which is by far the narrowest one of this 
age, and have made it the exacting rule by 
which one is allowed to pronounce upon the 
Christian order of forty-nine and to declare 
them without a church and church privileges 
and blessings, and very nearly, if not quite, 
without any well-founded hope of heaven ! 
"Whom the gods would destroy they first make 
mad." 

4. It is the purpose to prove in this book that 
Sprinkling, meaning the application of the water 
to the subject, is the Scriptural mode of per- 



14 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

forming the act of baptism. If this be true, 
Immersionists not only have not an exclusive 
right to the name Baptist, but have not an 
equal right to it with Paedobaptists. As the 
latter practice the mode of performance accord- 
ing to the Scripture, they are the true Scriptu- 
ral Baptists. Hence our opponents will be dis- 
tinguished by the name Immersionists ', as this 
discussion proceeds. 

Note. — This is a convenient place to give the etymology of 
some terms which are frequently used. The word Psedobaptist 
is made of two Greek words: paidos, of a child, and baptistes, 
baptist, and is a name applied to all who practice Infant Bap- 
tism. Antipaedobaptist means just the opposite to the above, 
having as a prefix the Greek anti, against. The word Ana- 
baptist has the prefix ana, anew, and was applied to a sect 
which arose in Germany in 1522 and held, as close-communion 
Baptists now hold, that persons baptized in infancy ought to be 
baptized anew on becoming believers. 



John's baptism. x 5 

CHAPTER III. 
john's baptism not christian baptism. 

The only recorded institution of Christian 
baptism was after Christ's resurrection, when 
he had finished his personal ministry on earth 
and was about to ascend his throne. The fol- 
lowing is the record of the solemn and memor- 
able occasion : 

"Then the eleven disciples went away into 
Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had ap- 
pointed them. And when they saw him, they 
worshipped him; but some doubted. And 
Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All 
pozver is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing 
them in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them 
to observe all things whatsoever I have command- 
ed you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto 
the end of the world." (Mat. 28 : 16-20.) 

Here is the whole of our direct authority for 



l6 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

administering Christian baptism and this our 
only Divine warrant to baptize "in the name of 
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost." Here, then, Christian baptism was in- 
stituted. It is, indeed, true that the disciples 
had before this baptized; but there is no evi- 
dence that they had done so in the form here 
prescribed. 

John's baptism was not Christian baptism. 
Because, First, Christian baptism had not yet 
been instituted. The legal dispensation came 
to a close only in the death and resurrection of 
Christ, after which, as has been seen, Christian 
baptism was instituted. The law of Moses 
ended in Christ not in John. 

Second, John began to baptize six months 
before Christ entered upon his public ministry ; 
and to suppose that his baptism was Christian 
baptism would be to suppose two absurdities, 
viz., that the initiatory ordinance of the Chris- 
tian system existed six months before Chris- 
tianity itself, and that Christ did not institute 
Christian baptism. 

Third, John baptized "with the baptism of 
repentance," (Acts 19:4), or on profession of 



JOHN S BAPTISM. \J 

repentance, and not on profession of regeneration 
as in Christian baptism. 

Fourth, John baptized neither in the name of 
Christ nor of the Holy Ghost. His disciples 
afterwards, when interrogated, confessed that 
they did not know Christ, and that they had 
" not so much as heard whether there be any 
Holy Ghost." See Matt. 16:13, 14, and Acts 

Fifth, Paul baptized John's disciples " in the 
name of the Lord Jesus," (Acts 19: 5,) paying 
no regard to their having been baptized by 
John, which he surely would not have done had 
John's baptism been Christian baptism. 

Sixth, That neither John's baptism nor bap- 
tism by Christ's disciples before his crucifixion, 
was Christian baptism is also manifest by the 
following: John must have baptized very many 
thousands of people. " Jerusalem and all Judea, 
and all the region round about Jordan" " went 
out unto him" and " were all baptized of him." 
And the disciples before Christ's crucifixion 
baptized great numbers. Yet immediately after 
Christ's ascention the whole number of the dis- 
ciples in the New Dispensation was only one 
hundred and twenty. (Acts 1 : 15.) 



1 8 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

Seventh, John's baptism took place under 
the Jewish dispensation. Yet it was not of the 
law; but was a specific institution for a special 
purpose, and hence was of oniy temporary ap- 
plication. The preaching of John and his min- 
istry in general was to " prepare the way of the 
Lord." His baptism was an ordinance for the 
time being and was preparatory to the ministry 
of Christ. 

Christ, until his crucifixion, as well as John, 
recognized the authority of the law of Moses 
and acted under it. He was " made under the 
law/' circumsized at eight days old, and all his 
public acts and all that was done in the Church 
previous to his death, belonged properly to the 
old dispensation. Hence he submitted to the 
form of John's baptism " to fulfill all righteous- 
ness/' that is, to fulfill every ordinance. 

Eighth, John's baptism was confined to the 
Jews and was therefore a Jewish ordinance. It 
was one of those "divers washings" mentioned 
Hebrews 9: 10, and did not alter Jewish forms 
of worship, nor did its subjects cease to be 
members of the Jewish Church on account of 
their baptism. 






JOHN S BAPTISM. 1<) 

Ninth, John's baptism was so called for a 
purpose. What was that purpose if not to dis- 
tinguish it from all other baptisms? 

Tenth, If John's baptism was the Christian 
baptism, then its subjects became Christians. 
As is elsewhere shown, John baptized no less 
than three millions of Jews. Then the Jewish 
nation was Christianized before Christ entered 
upon his ministry and Christ was condemned 
and crucified by a nation of Christians instead 
of a nation of Jews, and instead of the number 
of the disciples after the resurrection being 
about 120, they were at least 3,000,000, All 
of which conflicts with Scriptural facts. 

The conclusion is, that John's baptism was a 
Jewish ordinance; its subjects were Jews; and 
its administrator a Jew, the son of a priest and 
himself a priest. Could it be shown, as it can 
not, that John's baptism was by immersion, that 
would have very little weight in deciding the 
mode of Christian baptism. And we would not 
devote a chapter of this book to the considera- 
tion of its mode, were it not that immersionists 
need to be met in that field and defeated there 
as elsewhere. 



20 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER IV. 

THE MODE OF JOHN'S BAPTISM. 

Let us now proceed to investigate the mode 
of John's baptism. 

John himself gives us the mode of his baptiz- 
ing, thus, " I indeed baptize you with water 
unto repentance: but he that cometh after me 
is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy 
to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy 
Ghost, and with fire." (Matt. 3:11.) We sub- 
mit to the candid reader that this description, 
given by the administrator himself, not only 
does not mean immersion, to the exclusion of 
every other thought or opinion, as immersion- 
ists would have us all believe or else unchurch 
us all : but that it does not even so much as 
allow the possibility of immersion. 

Let us try the definitions given by the repre- 
sentative immersionists and see if this be true. 
Take Dr. Carson's definition of baptize, " to dip 
and to dip only," which is accepted by the 



MODE OF JOHN'S BAPTISM. 21 

whole army of immersionists ; and Rev. Alex- 
ander Campbell's definition of the action as 
previously quoted: "We must dip, only once, 
and the motion must be backwards," in which 
we also understand all immersionists of this day 
agree with him. Now substitute these two def- 
initions for baptize, the term defined by them, 
and we have John defining the rite performed 
by himself with water and the work done by 
Christ with the Holy Ghost and fire, in the fol- 
lowing singular, not to say obscure, language : 
" I indeed dip you, only once, backwards, with 
water: but he shall dip you, only once, back- 
wards, with the Holy Ghost and with fire." 
This illustrates the absurdity which results from 
the unauthorized assumptions and dogmatical 
assertions of extreme partisans who are blinded 
by the inflated shadow of only one idea. 

The real issue on the subject of the mode of 
baptism, is, whether the water is to be applied 
to the subject, or the subject applied to the wa- 
ter. John settles this question, so far as it re- 
gards' his baptism, by stating that it was "with 
water," that is, the water was applied to the 
subject 



22 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

But, having shown that John's baptism was 
not the Christian baptism, it follows that the 
mode of its administration does not determine 
the question as to the mode of Christian bap- 
tism. If it could be proved that John baptized 
by immersion, that would not prove that Chris- 
tian baptism should be by immersion. Yet it 
will not be without interest and profit to the 
reader for us to investigate the circumstances 
of John's baptism, so as to see how fully they 
corroborate his own statement as to the mode. 

We do not hesitate to say that the facts and 
circumstances of John's baptism not only ren- 
der immersion improbable: but we go further 
and say that they show immersion to have been 
impossible. For proof take the following facts: 

First. The numbers baptized by John ren- 
dered immersion in the case impossible. From 
Josephus' account of the population of Palestine, 
A. D. 68, it has been estimated, that it amount- 
ed in John's day to not less than seven millions 
and a half, John was commissioned to go to 
the Jews and he was unanimously received by 
them. There was no division of sentiment in 
regard to him, as in regard to Christ, and even 






MODE OF JOHN'S BAPTISM. 23 

the Pharisees and Saduces submitted to his 
baptism. The whole Jewish nation were ambi- 
tious of the distinction conferred by his bap- 
tism. Hence, " And there went out unto him 
all the land of Judea and they of Jerusalem and 
were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, 
confessing their sins." (Mark I : 5.) The land 
of Judea was more than half of the land of 
Palestine west of the Jordan, and was the most 
populous part of it. John, therefore, must have 
baptized not less than three millions of people # 
This number, though very large, is probably 
below rather than above the correct number; 
for Matthew says that " Jerusalem, and all 
Judea and all the region round about Jordan, 
went out to him and were baptized/' and Mark 
adds particular emphasis by saying that they 
" were all baptized." 

Now it is known that the public ministry of 
John continued for only about nine months, or 
two hundred and seventy-five days. It was not 
lawful for baptism to be performed on Sab- 
baths, and 40 days must be taken off for these. 
This would leave 235 days: and probably not 
all these were occupied in baptizing, as he 



24 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

would not probably begin until by some days 
of preaching he had convinced the people of 
his mission, and as his ministry included the 
winter season, during which there would be in 
that climate many days of inclement weather 
on which there would be no traveling about. 
So that 220 days is a liberal allowance for the 
number that he could have employed in bap- 
tizing. 

Now, supposing John to have been a man of 
the strongest physical endurance, which is not 
known, six hours a day is as long as he could 
endure to stand three feet deep in water and 
baptize for 220 days so nearly in succession, 
and especially as a part were in the winter sea- 
son. This would give 1,320 hours in which to 
baptize 3,000,000 persons. To accomplish this 
would require that he should baptize at the rate 
of thirteen thousand six hundred and thirty- 
eight per day : or two thousand two hundred 
and eighty-three per hour: or thirty-six per 
minute: or five in every eight seconds: or one 
in every second and a half, for six solid hours 
every day for 220 days in rapid succession. 
The veriest tyro can see at onqe that no hu- 






MODE OF JOHN S BAPTISM. 25 

man being could baptize at such rate by im- 
mersion. It is simply impossible. And yet the 
facts on which the above calculations are made 
are Scriptural, and, therefore, cannot be dis- 
puted. And who ever claims that John's bap- 
tism was by immersion, and on that claim un- 
churches forty-nine fiftieths of the whole Chris- 
tian world, exhibits deplorable ignorance or a 
blinded prejudice which is scarcely less pitiable. 
These considerations become the more strik- 
ing when we consider the facts : first, that much 
of the water of the Jordan came from the melt- 
ing snows in the mountains about its sources 
and was consequently cold, and, secondly, that 
the current is remarkably rapid and turbulent. 
Robinson, in his Physical Geography of the Holy 
Land, page 162, states that the distance from 
the Lake of Tiberias to the Dead Sea is sixty-five 
miles, and that the difference in the depression 
of the two lakes is 666 feet. This marks the 
rate of the descent of the Jordan between the 
two to be an average of 10.2 feet for each 
mile of its direct course. And on page 160 
he states that, at the part of the river where 
both Latin and Greek traditions locate the $a- 



26 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

vior's baptism, " the current is swift, deep and 
strong," so " very swift and strong, that the 
stoutest swimmers were carried down many 
yards in crossing/' the width being only about 
forty yards. The fall of the Mississippi River 
*s only a few inches to the mile. 

W. F. Lynch, of the U. S. Navy, who was 
sent on an exploring expedition to the Jordan 
in 1847, was compelled to use metallic boats in 
descending it. In his journal he states that he 
found the current " about twelve miles an hour," 
"'one foaming rapid," "with its tumultuous rush 
the river hurried us onward, and we knew not 
what the next moment would bring forth." 
" Sometimes, placing our sole trust in Provi- 
dence, we plunged with headlong velocity 
down appalling descents : " "a camel in the 
river, washed down by the current in at- 
tempting to cross the ford last night." And 
even at the spot where tradition locates 
the baptism of Christ by John, he found the 
current so impetuous that while some bathed, 
the boats were placed a little below " to be in 
readiness to render assistance should any of the 
crowd be swept down by the current, and in 



mode of john's baptism. 27 

danger of drowning." Indeed so dangerous was 
the river at this point, though not more so than 
elsewhere, that Lieut. Lynch, laboring under 
the delusion that Christ was immersed, was 
compelled to imagine a miracle to render his 
baptism possible. His language is, " On that 
wondrous day, when the Deity, veiled in flesh, 
descended the bank, all nature, hushed in awe, 
looked on ; and the impetuous river, in grateful 
homage, must have stayed its course and gently 
laved the body of its Lord." Expedition to 
the Dead Sea and the Jordan, pages 256-266. 

Now any one can see that no human being 
could have stood in this cold and dangerous 
current six hours a day for 220 days, even if it 
were not otherwise impossible, as previously 
shown, for John to have immersed the im- 
mense multitudes whom he baptized. Immer- 
sion in the case is clearly a physical impossi- 
bility. 

If any ask, by what mode, then, John could 
have baptized so many in the time specified, 
we answer: He himself tells us that he was not 
sent to abolish the Jewish rites, nor to intro- 
duce new ones; but to observe them. Had he 



28 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

undertaken to abolish the old or to introduce 
new ones, he would have met with opposition 
from the Jews instead of being unanimously re- 
ceived by them. The Jews had a custom of 
figuratively purifying the people by dipping a 
branch of hyssop in water and sprinkling it upon 
them. We are told, Heb. 9 : 19, that Moses took 
the blood of calves and of goats and with hys- 
sop sprinkled all the people. It is, therefore, 
probable that John, in baptizing the people with 
water, did not depart from the Jewish custom ; 
but followed the usage of Moses, and sprinkled 
the people in great numbers as they came to 
him, with a bunch of hyssop made sufficiently 
large for his purpose. This was the Jewish 
mode of purification, which Paul calls baptism. 
If it is supposed that our estimate of the 
numbers which John baptized is too high, we 
will state for the benefit of any who so think, 
that according to- the lowest estimate we have 
seen, and supposing that only one-third instead 
of "all" the people named by Matthew and 
Mark, came out to him and were baptized, even 
in that case it would have taken John three 
years and a half to have immersed them, instead 






mode of John's baptism. 29 

of nine months, supposing that he had immersed 
one person every two minutes and continued in 
the water ten hours every day. 

Second. But another and very serious diffi- 
culty is in the way of allowing that John's bap- 
tism was by immersion, viz : Were these meri- 
ads immersed in a state of nudity, in baptismal 
robes, or in their clothes? In the first condi- 
tion would have been an outrage and is not a 
possible supposition. Baptismal robes were un- 
heard of until centuries afterwards. Then they 
must have been immersed in their wearing ap- 
parel and returned dripping to their respective 
homes : for even if it could be supposed that so 
great a multitude had gone out provided with a 
change of clothing, to have made the change 
under the circumstances would have been an 
outrage. Now, what is to be said of the likeli- 
ness of such a spectacle in the name of religion 
and on the score of health and decency? And 
this question becomes the more forcible when 
it is considered that multitudes of these people 
were many miles distant from their homes, as 
any can see by consulting a map of Palestine. 

Added to these reflections, the reader may 



30 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

consider the presumption against immersion 
contained in the fact that the Scripture no- 
where makes any mention of a changing or lay- 
ing aside of garments in connection with the 
performance of baptism. This fact is the more 
noticeable when it is considered that mention 
is made of garments, where there could be no 
more necessity nor propriety of mentioning 
them, than in the case of baptism, supposing 
baptism to have been performed by immersion. 
For instance : When our Lord washed his dis- 
ciples' feet, it is said, "he laid aside his gar- 
ments/' (John 12:4.) And Luke, speaking of 
the stoning of Stephen, says : " The witnesses 
laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, 
whose name was Saul." (Acts 7: 58.) 

Now, if the Scriptures notice the apparently 
unimportant fact of the putting off of garments 
in such cases as the above-mentioned, how 
comes it to pass that no hint is dropped of a 
change or putting off of garments in any of the 
numerous cases of baptism? It can be ac- 
counted for only on- the supposition that no 
such putting off of garments took place. And 
this is strong presumptive evidence against im- 



MOt>E OF JOHN'S BAPtlSM. $t 

ffiersion. Think of the multitudes who flocked 
to John's preaching, and were baptized, doubt- 
less, without having anticipated or prepared for 
it: the baptism of Christ; and the baptism o* 
the eunuch, where evidently neither Philip nor 
the eunuch had expected or prepared for it; 
and suppose immersion in all these cases and 
not a hint about garments ! And the same re- 
markable omission may be mentioned in the 
other baptisms recorded in the New Testament, 
especially the baptism of Paul, of the three 
thousand, of the jailor, of Cornelius and his 
friends and of the sundry household baptisms. 
Third. In speaking of John's baptism, the 
administrator himself and Luke, who was a 
physician and scholar, use the Dative, without 
a preposition, to express the manner of it 
Greek scholars will understand this as 
"the Dative of the instrument." The Dative 
case, when thus used, means "the instrument 
with which a thing is accomplished" (Anthon's 
Grammar). "I indeed baptize yow—hudati — 
with water." (Luke 3 : 16.) " John indeed 
baptized — hudati — with water" (Acts 1:5.) 
"Then remembered I the word of the Lord, 



32 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

how that he said, John indeed baptized — hudati 
— with zuater.,' (Acts n : 16.) 

The use of the " Dative of the instrument," 
it being without a preposition, precludes the 
possibility of John's baptism being in water. 
It was with water, as the instrument. The 
water was applied to the subject, and not the 
subject to the water. If I say " I struck a horse 
with a whip," the whip is the instrument and is 
applied to the horse, and not the horse to the 
whip, nor is the horse put in the whip. Mat- 
thew, in recording the same sentence as Luke 
3 : 16, "I indeed baptize you with water," uses 
en hudati to express " with water " instead of 
hudati, the Dative of the instrument, as used by 
Luke, and the Greek preposition en is frequent- 
ly thus used with the Dative case of the noun 
as synonimous with the Dative of the instru- 
ment. See Matt. 23:37, "En, with all thy 
heart, and, en, with all thy soul, and, en, with 
all thy mind." Also see Luke 14: 34 and Matt. 
6 : 29. 

Fourth. Immersionists say that John's bap- 
tism was performed in the Jordan and, there- 
fore, must have been immersion. " Were bap- 



MODE OF JOHNS BAPTISM. 33 

tized of him in Jordan, " Matt. 3:6; " And 
were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan," 
Mark 1:5. If the expression " in the river of 
Jordan " above proves immersion, as is so con- 
fidently claimed, then we will ask the one who 
thus claims to tell us what the similar expres- 
sions in the following prove? " John did bap- 
tize in the wilderness," Mark 1:4; "These 
things were done in Bethabara, beyond Jordan, 
where John was baptizing," John 1 : 28. If the 
fact that he baptized "in the Jordan" proves 
beyond question that it was done by immersion, 
the fact that he baptized " in the wilderness " 
and "in Bethabara, beyond Jordan," proves, we 
should think, beyond question, that it was not 
done by immersion. The same Greek preposi- 
tion, en, is used in all three cases. Thus the 
"in Jordan" argument is, to say the least, 
doubly offset. 

But can these apparently conflicting state- 
ments be reconciled? Easily; if one will lay 
aside his preconceived prejudices and view the 
case with common sense in the light of facts. 
Biblical geography teaches us that the Jordan 
has double banks. In the inner banks, about 
I 



34 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

forty yards wide, the water flows at ordinary 
stages. In the outer banks, about a quarter of 
a mile wide, it flows in freshets. It was cus- 
tomary to say of whatever was done inside of 
these outer banks, that it was done " in the 
Jordan. " See 2 Kings 6:4: "And when they 
came (eis to?i Iordanan — Septuagint) to (should 
be into) Jordan they cut down wood." Here 
the Greek preposition, eis, is put after the verb 
of motion and before the Accusative of the ob- 
ject, which, as Greek scholars know, is the 
strongest form of the language to express into a 
place, and in this instance locates these beam- 
choppers and house-builders — see 2 Kings 
6:2 — "in the Jordan" while "cutting down 
wood." Of course inside the outer banks of 
the Jordan, or in the valley of the Jordan, is 
meant. Thus it may easily be seen how it is 
true that John baptized "in Jordan," " in the 
wilderness " and " beyond Jordan " as well. 
When viewed in the light of the truth that he 
sprinkled the people when he baptized them, 
there is no confliction in the statements. But 
claim that he immersed the people and then 
try to reconcile these statements and you will 



mode of john's baptism. 35 

at once find yourself involved in trouble. Tru- 
ly, as Mr. Miller has pertinently said, " The 
valley of Jordan is a land of sorrow for immer- 
sionists. ,, 

The Septuagint or Alexandrine version, from 
which the above quotation from 2 Kings is 
taken, is a translation of the Old Testament 
from the Hebrew language to the Greek, made 
150 to 275 years before Christ. Of its author- 
ity and accuracy, we need say nothing in addi- 
tion to the statement that Christ and the apos- 
tles, in referring to the Old Testament, quoted 
from this version. 

Fifth. It is urged in support of immersion 
that "John baptized in Enon, near to Salim, 
because there was much water there," 
John 3 : 23. It is argued that John chose 
a place where there was "much water" for 
the reason that water was needed for im- 
mersing the people. This argument loses the 
whole of its force by one stroke when it is re- 
membered that John went to Enon, the place 
of "much water," from the banks of the Jor- 
dan, a place of more water than Enon. The 
Jordan, as heretofore shown, is a deep river 



s6 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

and explorers. At any rate 

selecting Enon was in order to have mua 

selecting wonder why 

ter for immersing, we are lett to 

he left the place of more water for the place 

, Iter Let any one explain who can. 
less water. Let any ^ ^ 

The true reason for the 
Jordan to Enon was doubt^ ^s ^ ^ ^ 
Enon is a term of Hebrew o g ^ 

tfW or ^n«^. The U ee 
i**" which are translated much 
bei „ g in the pW ^^^w^ 
naturally translated many w ^ 

the same writer uses these , same 

v. ^ v are so translated, bee i^ev. 3 

where, hey are so ^^ ^^ „ 

« And his voice as the ^ here there 

Therefore Enon was a jocal y 
' were either a number of springs 
-earns flowing .from ^a sp «* The w 



MODE OF JOHN S BAPTISM. 37 

Especially was this the case in the winter and 
spring, the seasons during which John was bap- 
tizing. When the immense multitudes flocked 
to his baptism, as elsewhere shown, it is easy 
to see why John would move from the Jordan 
to Enon. The intention to immerse, if such 
had existed, would have led him to remain at 
the Jordan. 

As a suitable offset to the " much water " ar- 
gument of Immersionists, we give the following 
from The Pa^dobaptist's Guide, by the recent 
John Guthrie, D.D., of Scotland : 

u We grudge to spend more time over this 
most frivolous of arguments; but we cannot 
dismiss it without observing, that this " much 
water" argument is a two-edged weapon, which 
might be turned against its propounders with 
very damaging effect. If u much water" make 
for them, little water will make against them. 
How comes it, then, that of the nine or ten 
places mentioned in the New Testament, where 
baptisms were performed, only two — namely, 
^Enon and Jordan — had " much water?" How 
comes it that in some of these places there was 
but little water, and that, too, as we shall yet 
see, when thousands upon thousands were to 
be baptized ? As Professor Wilson, of Belfast, 



38 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

well puts this argument: i Much water is the 
exception, little water the rule. The ordinance 
could, indeed, be administered in the river Jor- 
dan, and at the many streams of yEnon; but so 
simple was the rite, that its performance appears 
to have been equally convenient in a private 
house, a prison, or a desert. If, then, the vol- 
ume of the Jordan is requisite to pour vigor into 
the Baptist argument for immersion, how sap- 
less and feeble must that argument become 
when its nutriment is drawn from the stinted 
supply of a prison, or the thirsty soil of a wil- 
derness.' Thus, the ' much water' argument 
fatally rebounds. It is a reed powerful only to 
pierce the hand that leans upon it." 

We now ask the thoughtful reader whether 
or not he has found any immersion in the "in 
Jordan" and " much water" arguments of Im- 
mersionists, and remark that these are all the 
reasons which they can claim for their bold as- 
sertions about John's baptism. In the language 
of Mr. Hibbard, if, after all these facts, any one 
" be not satisfied of the improbability and im- 
possibility of the immersion theory, we must, 
perhaps, leave him in the undisturbed and ever- 
lasting repose of his chosen, yet baseless faith." 






CHRIST S BAPTISM. 39 

CHAPTER V. 

Christ's baptism. 

The inexperienced and less informed are fre- 
quently pressed to follow the example of Christ 
in baptism, it being first assumed that he was 
immersed and that his baptism was intended 
to be an example for Christians. Perhaps no 
other appeal is used with half the effect of this 
upon those who have not informed themselves 
as to facts about Christ's baptism. 

We ask the reader's careful attention to the 
following: 

First. The baptism of Christ did not partake 
of the character of John's baptism. Because : 
I. John's baptism was " the baptism of repent- 
ance," otherwise said to be " unto repent- 
ance," or in testimony of their repentance. To 
suppose that the baptism of Christ was " the 
baptism of repentance," in testimony of his 
repentance of sin, would be blasphemy. 2. 
Doubtless the formula used in John's baptism 



40 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

is given by Paul in the following: "John verily 
baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying 
unto the people that they should believe on 
him who should come alter him, that is, on 
Christ Jesus," Acts 19 : 4. If, therefore, this 
was the baptism received by Christ, John must 
have exhorted him to the faith of a Messiah to 
come and Christ must have accepted that faith. 
Which is absurd. 3. The design of John's 
baptism was to " prepare the way of the Lord," 
or to prepare the hearts of the people to receive 
Christ. But this import of baptism could not 
apply to the Savior in any way. 

Second. Nor did the baptism of Christ par- 
take of the character of Christian baptism. 
Because: I. As has been shown in Chapter 
III, Christian baptism was not instituted until 
after Christ's resurrection, three years after his 
baptism. Its first administration was on the day 
of Pentecost. 2. Christian baptism is in the 
name of the Holy Trinity, the candidate there- 
by testifying his faith in the existence and glory 
of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. It is absurd 
to suppose Christ being baptized in his own 
name and professing faith in and devotion to 



CHRIST S BAPTISM. 41 

his own cause. 3. Christian baptism is both a 
sign and a seal in its import. As a sign it wit- 
nesses the inward washing or regeneration, 
which presupposes defilement by sin. As a 
seal it is a pledge of our fidelity to God and 
of his fidelity to us. Can any one suppose this 
sign and seal applicable to Christ? 

Third. Christ's baptism was not for the pur- 
pose of furnishing an example for Christians. 
Because : I. There are two New Testament 
Sacraments, the Lord's Supper and Baptism. 
If Christ's example was important in one it was 
in the other. But we know that Christ did not 
participate in the elements of the eucharist; but 
only gave to his disciples. See Matt. 26 : 27-29. 
If he left no example of personal celebration of 
the eucharist, is it not a strong presumption 
that he left none as to baptism ? 2. Christ 
was thirty years old when he was baptized. Is 
it a suitable example for young Christians to 
defer baptism until that age ; or does such de- 
lay comport with the early piety of Christ ? To 
suppose his baptism an example for his follow- 
ers would be to suppose it an example of pro- 
crastinaton! 3. The evangelists relate the bap- 



42 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

tism of the people as taking place previous to 
Christ's : " Now when all the people were bap- 
tized, it came to pass that Jesus also, being 
baptized, " etc., Luke 3:21. See also Matthew 
and Mark. If it were Christ's purpose to set an 
example for others to follow, it is strange that 
he should wait until thousands, not to say mil- 
lions, had been baptized previous to him. 4. It 
is not written in the Scripture that Christ was 
baptized to set an example for Christians to 
follow, nor is such doctrine deducible from the 
sacred text. 

We conclude, therefore, that the vigorous 
and often-repeated appeals to the pious sensi- 
bilities of young disciples to "follow the exam- 
ple of Christ" in baptism, is vain and gratuitous 
babbling, and has the appearance of being an 
effort of the unscrupulous to take advantage of 
the unwary. 

The reader will ask, Why then was the bap- 
tism of Christ necessary, or what was its pur- 
pose? The answer is at hand. Christ himself 
furnishes it. When John declined to baptize 
him, saying, " I have need to be baptized of 
thee, and comest thou to me," the Savior an- 






Christ's baptism. 43 

swered: "Suffer it to be so now; for thus it 
becometh us to fulfill all righteousness," Matt. 
3:14, 15. This answer satisfied John and he 
proceeded with the baptism. " To fulfill all 
righteousness" was, therefore, Christ's language 
to express the necessity and purpose of his bap- 
tism. What then does this language mean ? 

The phrases to " fulfill all righteousness," to 
" fulfill the righteousness of the law" and to 
" fulfill the law," are used in the New Testa- 
ment with similar import and refer to the 
fulfillment of the Mosaic law. When the 
Savior said to the Jews, " Think not that I am 
come to destroy the law or the prophets : I am 
not come to destroy, but to fulfill," Matt. 5:17, 
he evidently referred to the fulfillment of the 
Mosaic law and the form of speech is identical 
with that used by him to express the necessity 
and purpose of his baptism. Other instances 
might be given to show that the fulfillment of 
the requirements of the Mosaic law was what 
Christ meant by fulfilling all righteousness, but 
it is deemed unnecessary here. 

At the time of his baptism Christ was about 
to enter upon his public ministry. He had 



44 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

reached his thirtieth year — the age at which, 
under the Mosaic code, the priests were to en- 
ter upon the duties of their office and to receive 
their priestly consecration. Christ was a "high 
priest" and exercised the functions of a priest 
when he purged the temple, and when on that 
occasion his authority was demanded, he ap- 
pealed to the baptism of John as giving him, 
according to the law and custom, the authority 
of a priest. And if we search the whole Mo- 
saic code we will find no law requiring Christ's 
baptism at the particular time it took place, 
except the one regulating priestly consecra- 
tion. 

Much of the argument and arrangement of 
what has gone before in this chapter, is from 
the excellent book of Rev. F. G. Hibbard on 
Christian Baptism, a book of near 600 pages, 
which we cordially recommend to our readers. 
We now give the reader the benefit of the fol- 
lowing quotation from "Baptism Tested by 
Scripture and History," by Rev. Wm. Hodges, 
Covington, Ky. : 

"Until his crucifixion, Christ, as well as John, 
acted under and recognized the authority of the 



Christ's baptism. 45 

law of Moses; he was circumcised on the eighth 
day, brought to the temple and presented to the 
Lord, after his mother's purification ; attended 
the public worship of the temple, and drove 
from its hallowed courts the money changers, 
who would change his Father's house of prayer 
into a den of thieves. When he cleansed a 
leper, he bid him " go and show thyself unto 
the priest, and offer for thy cleansing, according 
as Moses commanded, for a testimony unto 
them," (Luke 5 : 14.) And in his public teach- 
ing to the multitude, told them, " The scribes 
and pharisees sit in Moses* seat : All, therefore, 
whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe 
and do ; but do not ye after their works ; for 
they say and do not" (Matt. 23 : 2, 3.) Al- 
most the last thing that he did before'he suf- 
fered, was in obedience to Moses, to observe 
the "passover.' (Matt. 26:17-25.) But here 
ended the Old Dispensation. 

" He had united with John in preparing the 
people for the New. He had submitted to his 
baptism, not because he needed repentance, but 
as recognizing John's mission and appointment 
from Heaven, and his ritual purification for the 
introduction of the New Dispensation, and as 
submitting himself also to all Heaven's regula- 
tions 'under the law' — 'to fulfill all righteous- 
ness.' (Matt. 3:15.) And it may be, to set 
him apart for his priestly office, as was Aaron. 



46 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

For John's baptism, as a preparation for the 
Gospel of Christ, was certainly very similar to 
the purification of the Israelites, to prepare 
them for the reception of the law at Mount 
Sinai. (See Exodus 19.) " 

We, therefore, conclude that the necessity for 
Christ's baptism existed in the fact that he 
needed to be consecrated to the priestly office 
and that baptism did that, — Ex. 29 and Lev. 7. 
And that this consecration or setting apart to 
the priestly office was of manifest necessity in 
his case, we need not take space to argue, but 
will only suggest, as an illustration, that this 
consecration was needed in order to vindi- 
cate his authority as a priest on such occasions 
as the purging of the temple, heretofore re- 
ferred to. 

We conclude also, that the purpose of Christ's 
baptism was to vindicate the majesty and to 
magnify the import of the " law and the proph- 
ets" by his compliance, who was himself the 
"end of the law" — to whom all the types and 
prophesies pointed and in whom they met — 
who was himself the " high priest " in whose 
character God was to illustrate that justice in 



Christ's baptism. 47 

whose unbalanced scales man had been found 
wanting and to exhibit his infinite love to man. 

The man who, in the light of the above facts, 
drawn from the sacred oracles, will still persist 
in urging the uninformed to follow the example 
of Christ in " fulfilling all righteousness " by 
immersion in " the liquid grave/' is an object of 
commiseration. 

We will now proceed to consider the ques- 
tion of the mode of Christ's baptism. This we 
do, not because we think the mode of it, what- 
ever it was, established the proper mode of 
Christian baptism, but because, as previously 
stated, we wish to meet and defeat Immersion- 
ists in every part of the field. 

First. Having shown that Christ's baptism 
was his consecration to the priest's office, it re- 
mains to inquire by what mode do the Scrip- 
tures inform us the water was used in such con- 
secration. In the case of Aaron and his sons 
the record of consecration is, "And Aaron and 
his sons thou shalt bring to the door of the tab- 
ernacle of the congregation, and shalt wash 
them with water," Ex. 29:4. In this case the 
action was with water. But the whole tribe of 



48 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

Levi were to be consecrated to the service of 
the sanctuary, as well as Aaron and his sons. 
And that which is expressed in general terms, 
in the case of the lartter, viz: "Thou shalt wash 
them with water/' is in the case of the conse- 
cration of the Levites given in specific and par- 
ticular terms as to its manner. "And thus shalt 
thou do unto them to cleanse them: sprinkle 
water of purification upon them." Here the 
mode of applying the water in the consecration 
is established by Divine appointment. Now, 
as the Scriptures are as silent as the grave as to 
any change of this Divine law and long-prevail- 
ing custom, in the case of the baptism or con- 
secration of Christ, we are forced to the conclu- 
sion that no such change took place and that 
Christ fulfilled the law in this particular, as in 
all others. 

Second. The reliance to prove that Christ's 
baptism was by immersion is the use of the 
prepositions in and out of in the record: "And 
was baptized of John in Jordan. And straight- 
way coming out of the water," etc., Mark 1 : 
9, 10. On this we make the following remarks: 

That the Greek preposition eis, which, in this 






Christ's baptism. 49 

case, is translated " in," and the Greek preposi- 
tion apo, which is translated " out of," are much 
more frequently translated to, at, by, with, etc., 
and from. Prepositions of similar import are 
used in the case of the baptism of the eunuch, 
where eis is translated "into," and ek " out of." 
In these two instances, viz : the baptism of Christ 
and the baptism of the eunuch, our translators 
were partial to the Immersionists ; for the en and 
eis, which they here render "in" and "into" — 
as " into the water," they have rendered to or unto 
in 538 cases: apo, which they here render "out 
of" — as "out of the water," they have in 374 
cases rendered from ; and ek, which is here ren- 
dered "out of," is in 186 other instances ren- 
dered from. Thus it is readily seen that the 
in-the-Jordan and out-ofthe-water argument is 
offset hundreds of fold and that the prepositions 
used in them, when intelligently weighed in the 
light of facts, turn upon the Immersionists who 
wield them with crushing power, like the ele- 
phants of King Pyrrhus* army. 

And it is quite as apparent that Mark's rec- 
ord of Christ's baptism, as above quoted, may 
be with equal or greater correctness rendered 



50 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

thus: "And was baptized of John at the Jordan. 
And straightway coming up from the water," 
etc. And Xew Testament usage determines 
that it should neither be "in" nor "into" but 
"at the Jordan:" and that it should not be 
"out of" but "from the water." Our Immersion- 
ist friends are well enough pleased with King 
James' translators as long as the version favors 
their pet and partisan views, but are irrecon- 
cilably opposed when any term is so rendered 
as not to prop up the visionary idea of immer- 
sion as a substitute for Christian baptism. 

Third. We have shown in the previous chap- 
ter that the expression "in the Jordan," which, 
it is freely conceded, is a correct rendering of 
the original Greek, but not the only correct one, 
did not mean necessarily in the water of the 
Jordan, but rather in the valley of the Jordan. 
In addition to what is there said, we will here 
say, that the reader will more readily apprehend 
and appreciate this fact if he will examine the 
map of the Jordan and its valley, which accom- 
panies Lieut. Lynch's " Exploration of the Jor- 
dan and the Dead Sea." When the Savior 
came from Galilee to John to be baptized, he 



CHRIST S BAPTISM. 5 I 

found him "in the Jordan " baptizing, in the 
the same way that the choppers were " in the 
Jordan cutting down wood," mentioned in the 
previous chapter. That is, in the valley, or 
within the outer banks of the Jordan, or "in the 
wilderness" in the valley of the river: all of 
which are expressions which mean the same 
thing. This will be the more readily accepted 
as true when it is remembered that immediately 
following his baptism " he was there in the wil- 
derness forty days, tempted of the devil." Mark 
1:13. 

The same phrase in the Greek which would 
put Christ in the water of the river Jordan re- 
ceiving baptism, and John and his numberless 
disciples in the water of the same river and 
Philip and the eunuch in the water, and all for 
the pleasure of enthusiastic but over credulous 
Immersionists, would also locate "the sons of 
the prophets " in the midst of the rapid current 
and the waves of the deep and turbulent waters 
of the Jordan while "cutting down wood" and 
"felling beams." 2 Kings 6:4, 5. And the 
same Greek word and the same reasoning which 
locate John and Christ in the water of the Jor- 



52 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

dan for baptism, present Christ as taking up 
his abode in the water of that dangerous stream, 
viz: Jesus went " into the place where John at 
first baptized ; and there he abode." John 10 : 40. 

When an argument proves too much it 
proves nothing and is even worse, it becomes 
repulsive to him who wields it ; and one would 
think that the above facts would render the "in- 
the-Jordan" argument, which is the only one 
they have, as repulsive to Immersionists as was 
the magic balsam of Sanco Panza to the credu- 
lous and disappointed stomach of Don Quixote. 

Fourth. Granting that Christ was really in 
the water of the river of Jordan, does that prove 
so clearly that he was immersed, as to justify 
the one-fiftieth part of the Christian world, who 
so believe, in unchurching the other forty-nine 
fiftieths who do not so believe ? We think not, 
for these reasons : The Oriental costume, when 
girt up, left the feet uncovered except by soles, 
which were easily slipped off and on, so that to 
be standing in the water would be no discom- 
fort, but rather the opposite, especially in a 
warm and dry climate. Indeed, we know of no 
valid objection to supposing that John stood 



CHRIST S BAPTISM. 53 

upon the bank of the river, as the Christian art 
of the fourth and fifth centuries represents him 
in pictures, frequently dipping his bunch of hys- 
sop into the water and with it sprinkling the 
willing thousands — publicans and soldiers as 
well, Luke 3 : 12-14 — wno would pass in crowds 
in the edge of the river before him. This sup- 
position can be the more readily considered 
from the fact that they would thus gain the 
cooling and refreshing effects of the water on 
their lower extremities and would avoid the 
dust which would, under other circumstances, 
attend the presence and moving of such multi- 
tudes. The earliest Christian art, in numerous 
pictures which are still in existence, represents 
John standing upon the bank of the Jordan and 
Christ standing in the water before him, while 
he is receiving baptism by affusion. These pic- 
tures by the early Christians show how they 
understood that Christ's baptism was performed. 
There being nothing, absolutely nothing, to 
the contrary, I, for one, am willing to accept 
the teachings of these early Christians on this 
subject, seeing they agree with Scripture. 
Etr. Thompson, the missionary, describes the 



54 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

Jordan pilgrims of the present age as plunging 
into the river and there performing acts of cer- 
emonial purification by standing and pouring 
water on each other's heads, in imitation of the 
baptism of Christ. And Lieut. Lynch, in his 
book heretofore mentioned, describes the very 
spot in the Jordan where tradition locates the 
baptism of Christ and, although he seems to 
have accepted, we suppose without investiga- 
tion, the mythical idea that said baptism was 
by immersion, he gives us an engraving of the 
scene of some of these enthusiastic pilgrims 
performing these purifications, while two of his 
metallic boats, well manned, are placed below 
to save any who might be in danger of drown- 
ing from the force and rapidity of the current. 
I again quote from Dr. Guthrie : 

" Where, then, I ask, is there the slightest 
trace that the blessed Savior was immersed ? 
On this point the prepositions are silent ; 'bap- 
tizo ■ is silent ; and if the Evangelists otherwise 
are silent, where is this much vaunted case of 
immersion? There being no evidence that our 
Lord was immersed, we conclude that he was 
baptized by sprinkling or pouring. For, (i.) 
That was the mode in the Jewish 'purifications/ 



CHRIST S BAPTISM. 55 

which were just so many ' baptisms/ to the en- 
tire exclusion of immersion. (2.) All the pro- 
prieties of the case, before noticed, militate here 
with augmented force against the idea of im- 
mersion. (3.) The manner in which the Spirit 
descended on the Savior's head harmonizes best 
with the mode by pouring, and with the univer- 
sal tenor of inspired language, both in the Old 
Testament and the New, which represents the 
Spirit as ' poured out ' or * falling upon ' us, and 
not as dipped or plunged into the Spirit." 



56 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER VI. 

CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. 

We have shown on page 15, that Christian 
baptism was instituted after the resurrection of 
Christ and that its history is after that event. 
There are nine cases of Christian baptism re- 
corded in the New Testament. So far as the 
history of the ordinance is concerned these nine 
administrations are the only sources from which 
we can draw information. If, from the circum- 
stances attending them, we can determine the 
mode of administering, then the question of 
mode is settled for all Christians. If the mode 
cannot be certainly determined from them, 
then that mode which appears most probably 
to have been the one practised in these cases, 
should have precedence, of course. 

We will, therefore, now proceed to investi- 
gate these cases and see whether or not the 
circumstances attending them indicate that the 
baptized were immersed. We respectfully ask 



THE THREE THOUSAND. 57 

the reader to enter with us upon this fair inves- 
tigation with a mind not preoccupied by opin- 
ions and prejudices. 

THE THREE THOUSAND. 

The first account of the administration of 
Christian baptism is in these words : " They 
that gladly received his word were baptized, 
and the same day there were added unto them 
about three thousand souls," Acts 2:41. This 
occurred in the city of Jerusalem, on the day of 
Pentecost. The principal preacher was Peter; 
the audience was composed of citizens and 
great numbers who had assembled at Jerusalem 
from eighteen or more foreign countries (see 
verses 9-1 1); the administrators were Peter and 
the eleven other apostles (see verse 14). Was 
this baptism performed by immersion ? We 
answer, no; for the following reasons: 

First. There is not a hint in the Scriptural 
narrative which gives the remotest ground on 
which to suppose it was immersion. It appears 
from the narrative that they were baptized at 
the very spot and at the very time that they 
believed. On the supposition that these three 



58 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

thousand subjects were dispersed throughout 
and around the city, for the purpose of finding 
pools or streams suitable for immersion, the 
narrative, to say the least, is an unnatural and 
unsatisfactory one. But on the supposition that 
the baptism was by sprinkling, the narrative is 
natural, easy and satisfactory. 

Second. Isaiah, in predicting the humilia- 
tion and exaltation of Christ, and the success 
which should attend his cause, prophesied that 
" many nations " should be introduced into the 
Church. (Isaiah 52:7-15.) This prophecy be- 
gan to be fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, only 
a few days after the Savior's ascension, when 
the representatives of nineteen or twenty differ- 
ent nations were present to hear, many of them 
the first time, the preaching of the gospel and 
to witness the outpouring of the Spirit on that 
remarkable occasion. In fulfillment of the 
prophecy, about three thousand of them were 
introduced into the Church by baptism. How 
was this baptism performed? Turn back to the 
prophecy and read: "So shall he sprinkle many 
nations." Isaiah 52: 15. Read the fifty-second 
chapter of Isaiah and it will occur to you that 



THE THREE THOUSAND. $g 

the whole scene there predicted was to take 
place at the very opening of the gospel dispen- 
sation : and how completely is it fulfilled in the 
scene on the day of Pentecost ! And who will 
say that of all the details of the fulfillment, the 
mode of administration of baptism was the only 
exception, and yet no allusion in the narrative 
to such exception and no hint to justify the sup- 
position that it existed ? 

Third. There was no place nor places for the 
immersion of so great a multitude on that "same 
day." The Jordan was twenty-five miles dis- 
tant. The brook Kidron was an unimportant 
and turbid stream, which flowed along the east 
side of the city and the authorities say its chan- 
nel was always dry, except in winter: and the 
Pentecost was in June. And if it had not been 
dry a sewer poured all the filth of the northern 
part of the city into it, rendering it totally unfit 
for a place of immersing. Siloam was at the 
foot of Mount Moriah, three-quarters of a mile 
from where the apostles were preaching, and we 
have no account of their going to it with the 
thousands who heard them: Bethesda was in 
the control of the priests, the avowed enemies 



60 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

of the cause of Christ, who ridiculed the trans- 
actions of the day, saying: " These men are full 
of new wine," and it cannot be supposed that 
they would allow its use to the apostles. For 
the same reason, and others, they would not be 
allowed the use of the washing lavers of the 
temple. And it cannot be supposed that they 
would be admitted in such large numbers to the 
few private tanks and cisterns of the rich, for 
very few of them were disposed to befriend the 
cause of Christ. 

Wm. C. Prime, a recent explorer, writes in his 
book thus of Jerusalem: "The city is depend- 
ent for its supply of water chiefly on the rains 
of heaven. This subject has been a fruitful 
source of discussion to Oriental travelers, and 
it is very certain that as yet little progress has 
been made in explaining where the immense 
population that once inhabited Jerusalem ob- 
tained their supply of this necessary of life. ,> 
The three or four pools which exist in the city, 
are stated, on the best authority, to be from 
eighteen to forty feet deep and the sides per- 
pendicular, not sloping, so that each one is as 
deep at the edge as at any other point. If the 



THE THREE THOUSAND. 6 1 

apostles could have had free access to them, 
which was impossible, they would still have 
found immersion impossible, as the most shal- 
low of these pools is eighteen feet perpendicu- 
lar at the edge. 

Fourth. The time allowed for baptizing these 
three thousand was not sufficient to admit of 
the supposition that they were immersed. Pe- 
ter's sermon began at nine o'clock in the morn- 
ing, "the third hour of the day." Acts 2:15. 
There is no mention of a change of the day un- 
til chapter 4, verse 3. All that is narrated from 
chapter 2 to chapter 4 took place on the day of 
of Pentecost. At "the ninth hour," or three 
o'clock p. m., we find Peter and John going 
quietly into the temple, it being the " hour of 
prayer." Acts 3:1. The preaching, conver- 
sions and baptizings all took place in just six 
hours — from nine a. m. to three p. m. This 
would give to each one of the twelve apostles 
six hours for completing the whole of the 
preaching, instruction and preparation neces- 
sary to the conversion of two hundred and fifty 
persons, mostly foreigners or heathen, and to 
their baptism. And this all so entirely com- 



62 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

pleted in the given time that Peter and John, 
two of the imtnersionists, had dried their clothes 
and were ready to go into the temple to prayer 
at three in the afternoon ! 

However the above may be, certainly after 
the close of Peter's sermon, only a part of the 
day remained. The converts must be selected 
from the multitude and questioned as to their 
faith and experience. And, as they had come 
together with no expectation of conversion nor 
baptism, if immersed, they were to be provided 
with a change of raiment, etc., etc. All this 
would occasion great delay. Now, suppose the 
apostles had access to even all the places above 
mentioned, it was impossible for twelve admin- 
istrators to have scattered about to these dis- 
tant, inconvenient and inadequate places and to 
have immersed three thousand in so limited a 
time. And this is the more palpable when it is 
considered that the administrators and their 
three thousand subjects were all alike taken by 
surprise by the circumstances of the occasion. 
Not having anticipated the scenes they had not 
prepared for them. But no such difficulties 
exist on the supposition that the baptism was 



THE THREE THOUSAND. 63 

performed according to the prophecy, by sprin- 
kling, the prevalent mode of purifying among 
the Jews. 

We again quote from Mr. Miller's admirable 
little book : 

" The very men who would fain believe, in 
the face of all these facts, that these three thou- 
sand were immersed would, as a jury, hang a 
man until he was dead, dead, upon as strong 
evidence that he had committed murder as the 
above is against their dogma." 



64 Mode of baptism 



CHAPTER VII. 

CHRISTIAN BAPTISM — THE SAMARITANS. 

The second case of Christian baptism on rec- 
ord was by Philip in Samaria of quite a number 
of the population : " But when they believed 
Philip preaching the things concerning the king- 
dom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they 
were baptized, both men and women." Acts 
8:12. There are no circumstances in this case 
which indicade the mode, except that it appears 
that they were baptized at the very time when 
and on the very spot where they believed. And 
this is a suitable place to remark, that this cir- 
cumstance is uniform in the cases of Christian 
baptism in the New Testament. There is no- 
where any mention of going away to or in search 
of a stream or pool, nor of any arrangement or 
delay to prepare for a change of garments, but 
immediately upon believing and at the very 
spot, the subjects were baptized. Is it likely 
that such would have been the uniform record 
had the various cases of baptism been by im- 
mersion? 



The eunuch. 65 

the eunuch. 

The third case of Christian baptism is that of 
the Ethiopean eunuch by Philip, recorded in 
the eighth chapter of Acts. Immersionists say 
that the circumstances of this case prove im- 
mersion beyond dispute, but an intelligent ex- 
amination of the case shows that its circum- 
stances are conclusive in favor of sprinkling. 
We ask the reader to turn to Acts 8 : 26-39, ar| d 
read the history of the case and thus he will be 
the better prepared to consider the circum- 
stances with us. 

As will be seen, this eunuch was a man of 
high authority and power and had charge of all 
the treasures of the queen of Ethiopia. He was 
a Jew and had gone up to Jerusalem in his 
chariot to worship, as a Jew, not as a Christian. 
On his return, having in his possession a copy 
of the Jewish Scriptures, he was leisurely read- 
ing, while pursuing his journey, that wonderful 
prophecy of Christ which begins at Isaiah 52: 
13, and continues through Isaiah 53. The 
reader will bear in mind that at that time the 
Scriptures had not been divided into chapters. 



66 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

Philip, just from the scenes of his preaching 
and baptizing in Samaria, was directed by the 
Spirit, so that he met the eunuch on the high- 
way, just at the time that he was reading this 
prophecy, and, accosting him, he said: "Under- 
standest thou what thou readest?" In reply 
the eunuch confessed that he did not under- 
stand and could not without a teacher. Hav- 
ing invited Philip to sit with him in the chariot, 
he inquired of him whether the prophet wrote 
those wonderful predictions " of himself or of 
some other." Immediately Philip " began at 
the same Scripture, and preached unto him 
Jesus." The eunuch was convinced and be- 
lieved ; and as they proceeded on their way, 
seeing water, he proposed that he receive bap- 
tism, which Philip at once administered on his 
earnest profession of faith. Now, the question 
is, was this baptism performed by immersion ? 
We say it was not, for the following and other 
reasons : 

First. The sole ground upon which it can 
be claimed that this was an immersion, is the 
expression that they both " went down into the 
water" and came " up out of the water." The 






THE EUNUCH. 67 

Greek prepositions eis and ek y which are here 
translated "into" and "out of" are, in hundreds 
of other cases, as previously intimated, trans- 
lated "to" and "from;" and are in very many 
instances used where their translation by "into" 
and "out of" is impossible. The expression 
then would be more in conformity to the orig- 
inal if translated " went down to the water" and 
came " up from the water." Of this we will say 
more as we proceed. That the translators ren- 
dered it as they did, we can account for only 
on the supposition that they were themselves 
inclined to the immersion theory, which we 
have also other reasons for thinking was the 
case. Let the reader now for a moment reflect 
on the absurdity of deciding an important ques- 
tion, which is made to determine as to the ec- 
clesiastical order and to test the spirit of obedi- 
ence or disobedience of Christendom, on the 
simple question as to the correctness or incor- 
rectness of the translation of two Greek prepo- 
sitions, in any particular place, which are other- 
wise and variously translated in other places in 
Scripture ! 

Second. The Greek particle eis, which is 



68 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

here rendered into, is used with other significa- 
tions in very many places in Scripture; some of 
which are here given as samples : " Go thou to 
(eis) the sea," — not into the sea. Matt. 17: 27. 
" I am not sent but unto {eis) the lost sheep of 
the house of Israel," — not into the lost sheep. 
Matt. 15 : 24. " Come unto (eis) the marriage," 
— not into the marriage. The Evangelist John 
declares positively that in the following passage 
eis does not mean into: "Peter therefore went 
forth, and that other disciple, and came to (eis) 
the sepulchre. * * And the other disciple did 
outrun Peter, and came first to (eis) the sepulchre : 
* * yet ivent he not in." John 20 : 3-5. Exam- 
ples might be multiplied almost indefinitely, as 
eis is rendered to or unto 538 times ; but certainly 
these are sufficient to show that eis would take 
Philip and the eunuch to the water; but no 
further. 

Also, the Greek preposition ek, which is here 
translated " out of," is otherwise used as fol- 
lows : " Sever the wicked from (ek) the just," — 
certainly not out of the just. Matt. 13:49. 
" The tree is known by (ek) its fruits," — certain- 
ly not out of its fruits. Matt. 12:23. "Many 



THE EUNUCH. 69 

good works have I shown you from (ek) my 
father," — surely not out of my father. " And 
he riseth from (ek) supper, and laid aside his 
garments," — not out of supper. " When he 
shall return from (ek) the wedding." " And 
they shall gather together his elect from (ek) 
the four winds." As in the case of eis, exam- 
ples might be multiplied indefinitely, as ek is 
rendered from 186 times; but the above are 
enough to show that ek would bring Philip and 
the eunuch from the water only. 

It is therefore evident that the language used 
in reference to Philip and the eunuch can prove 
nothing more than that they descended from 
their seats in the chariot to the water and that 
after the baptism they ascended again to said 
seats. What is an argument worth, in any 
cause, when based on so weak a foundation as 
the rendering of two particles which have num- 
berless meanings and shades of meanings, ac- 
cording to the connection in which they stand ? 

"The folly of resting so exclusive a claim, as 
Immersionists set up, upon two prepositions, 
must be manifest when we state that eis is used 
1,730 times in the New Testament, and with, 



JO MODE OF BAPTISM. 

perhaps, ioo different shades of meaning; and 
that ek is used about 1,000 times, with fifty or 
more different meanings." — Miller. 

Third. But our opponents will say, Why 
say they "went down to the water" and "came 
up from the water," if no immersion took place? 
We have a reason to give for the use of this 
language, which we have not seen mentioned 
by any of the many authors whose books we 
have read on this subject. It is this: The eu- 
nuch " desired Philip that he should come tip 
and sit with him." Acts 8:31. The coming it p 
in this case plainly meant ascending to the seat 
in the chariot. Now, when they zvent down y 
they simply reversed the action of Philip, when 
he went up ; that is, they descended from the 
seats in the chariot. This is the natural and 
easy interpretation of the language, and is cor- 
roborated by the fact that the evangelist spe- 
cially mentions that " both Philip and the eunuch 
went down." There must be a reason for spe- 
cially stating that they both went down. That 
reason is, that only Philip had been mentioned 
as coming up y and when his action was reversed 
it was done by both. 



THE EUNUCH. 7 1 

And it is stated that they both "came up," 
or ascended again to the seats in the chariot, as 
Philip had previously " come up." This state- 
ment, that they both ascended again into the 
chariot, is made in order to prepare for stating 
the scene which soon took place ; namely, as 
they proceeded on the journey, suddenly "the 
Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the 
eunuch saw him no more: and he (the eunuch) 
went on his way rejoicing." Acts 8 : 39. 

The Greek verb, which is rendered " come 
up " in one of these verses, is the identical one 
which is rendered "come up" in the other. 
In one verse the action was certainly ascending 
to the seat in the chariot from the ground; of 
course it is the same in the other verse. This 
verb is an-ebasan, " come up." The verb which 
is rendered "went down" is the same simple 
verb, ebasan, with a different prefix, which re- 
verses its action, namely, kat-ebasan, " went 
down." The action in the one case being sim- 
ply that of ascending to the seat in the chariot, 
as we have shown that it certainly was, the ac- 
tion in the other was as certainly descending 
from the seat in the chariot — nothing more, 



72 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

An unprejudiced reading of the Scriptural nar- 
rative will convince any one that this is a cor- 
rect interpretation of the language and that the 
much-abused "went down into the water" and 
"come up out of the water" mean nothing more 
nor less than that the two descended from seats 
in the chariot to the water, and, after the bap- 
tism, resumed their seats in the chariot. 

Fourth. What led the eunuch to think of 
being baptized just at this time, was Philip's 
preaching and opening to him the meaning of 
the passage of Scripture, which he had just 
been reading. In the third verse of the pas- 
sage is . the prophesy, M So shall he sprinkle 
many nations." Isaiah 52:15. This, doubt- 
less, Philip had explained to him. So that, so 
far as mode is concerned, it was sprinkling, 
which was in the mind of the eunuch, when he 
asked baptism. Being a Jew, he was accus- 
tomed to sprinkling as the mode of purification, 
and he could have expected nothing else than 
to be baptized in that way. And had Philip 
proceeded to baptize him by any other mode, 
he would have had first to have explained to 
him that the mode had been changed from that 



THE EUNUCH. 73 

predicted by the prophet and to which he was 
accustomed as a Jew, and that immersion had 
been substituted and the reasons for the change. 
But the narrative, which details even small cir- 
cumstances, gives no hint of any of all this hav- 
ing been done, for the reason that it was not 
done: but Philip baptized him in accordance 
with the prophesy. 

Fifth. The statement is that this baptism 
took place "in a desert." Acts 8 : 26. It was 
not far from the place where Abraham and 
Isaac were obliged to dig wells to get water for 
their flocks; and "the herdmen of Gerar did 
strive with Isaac's herdmen, saying, The water 
is ours." Gen. 26 : 20. To presume that there 
was a river or any considerable body of water 
of any kind, sufficient for immersing, in this 
desert, is but a fancy. The eunuch, it appears, 
was rather surprised and pleased to find any 
water in such a place. It was doubtless one of 
those "springing waters " or "springs" in the 
desert, mentioned Gen. 26: 19, and boiling out 
of the ground in a small quantity, afforded no 
place for immersion. The Greek word trans- 
lated certain — "a certain water" — is ti % whiqh 



74 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

does not indicate a well-known body or foun- 
tain of water, as a scholar will at once compre- 
hend : but some or any water. " They came to 
some water," would be a strictly correct render- 
ing. Also ti sometimes has the sense of a di- 
minutive; and the rendering would also be cor- 
rect were it, "They came to a little water." 
The eunuch's expression, " See, here is water," 
literally translated, is, Behold water, and is a 
form of expression which indicates a small 
rather than a large amount of water. 

The circumstances of this whole narrative in- 
dicate a place or region of but little water — " a 
desert" — and the evangelist, guided by the 
Spirit, protects us against the attacks of infi- 
delity, by giving the details of the case. Had 
he simply said, "And he baptized him," infidels 
would have said, " It is a desert. Where was 
the water? Did he baptize him in the chariot 
or out of it? And, if in it, how did he get the 
water there?" etc., etc. But, by giving the 
particulars, that when some, or a little water, 
was discovered they disembarked from the 
chariot, procured the water and "he baptized 
him," the mouth of infidelity is closed, 



THE EUNUCH, 



75 



We have considered this, the third case of 
Christian baptism, at the greater length, from 
the fact that this is the only one of the nine 
cases in the New Testament to which Immer- 
sionists appeal for support for their visionary 
and proscribing theory. 



76 MODE OF BAPTISM, 

CHAPTER VIII. 

CHRISTIAN BAPTISM — PAUL. 

The fourth case of Christian baptism in the 
sacred history is that of Paul. The record is 
as follows : 

"And Ananias went his way, and entered 
into the house;- and putting his hands on him 
said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that 
appeared unto thee in the way as thou earnest, 
hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy 
sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And 
immediately there fell from his eyes as it had 
been scales : and he received sight forthwith, 
and arose, and was baptized. And when he had 
received meat, he was strengthened." — Acts 9: 
17-19. 

And: 

" And now why tarriest thou ? arise, and be 
baptized." — Acts 22 : 16. 

All we know about the mode of Paul's bap- 
tism is given in the above quotation. We ask 
the reader to candidly consider the language 
£tnd decide for himself whether or not there 15 



BAPTISM OF PAUL. 77 

any room for the supposition of immersion in 
the case. Paul was in the house of one Judas, 
in the city of Damascus. He was blind, weak- 
ened and exhausted. When Ananias spoke to 
him, he "forthwith received his sight, and arose, 
and was baptized, and when he had received 
meat, he was strengthened." Not one hint is 
given about leaving the house for baptism and 
again returning for " meat." The "receiving 
sight," "arising," "being baptized" and "re- 
ceiving meat," all occur 4n rapid succession 
without removing from the spot where Ananias 
found him. 

The circumstances of this case preclude the 
idea of immersion: 

First It is not admissible to suppose that 
the writer would narrate small and apparently 
unimportant circumstances and yet would omit, 
right in the midst of them, such a circumstance as 
leaving the house before the train of circumstan- 
ces was completed and going some distance in 
search of a river or pool, and then returning to 
the house for the completing of the train of cir- 
cumstances. While this fact does not prove 
positively that the baptism was not by immer- 



?8 MODE OF BAPTISM* 

sion, it is so strong a presumptive evidence 
against it, that it amounts to very little short of 
positive proof. 

Second. It seems that Paul had grown weak 
under the prostrating effects of the scene 
through which he had passed and three days of 
fasting. Acts 9 19. Hence the statement that 
"when he had received meat, he was strength- 
ened. " The statement of his being strength- 
ened seems to have been made for the purpose 
of calling attention to the fact that he had be- 
come weak, and his weakness must have been 
considerable to have been the subject of men- 
tion in the brief narrative. Now observe that 
his baptism took place before he was relieved 
from this weakness. Can any one suppose that 
the going out for the immersion of a subject in 
such condition and the return to the house, 
would be omitted by the evangelist from a nar- 
rative in which he gives even so small a par- 
ticular as that "he arose ?" The fact that noth- 
ing of the kind — not even a hint — occurs in the 
narrative, under the circumstances, precludes 
the possibility of immersion in this case. 

Third. The command of Ananias was, "Arise, 



BAPTISM OF PAUL. 79 

and be baptized : " Paul " arose, and was 
baptized." Now, in both these cases a word is 
used which implies, not only that Paul was bap- 
tized in the house, but that he was standing up. 
The word is anastas y which is the second aorist 
participle of the verb anistami. This verb is 
defined by the lexicons to mean "to stand up, 
arise, rise up." The participle, anastas, is, there- 
fore, "having stood up," etc. Ananias' com- 
mand to Paul, therefore, when literally ren- 
dered, was, "having stood up, be baptized," 
and Paul's compliance was, "having stood up, 
he was baptized." 

The use of this participle in the New Testa- 
ment not only shows that it means an upright 
posture, but that the action performed by the 
person rising followed immediately on his rising. 
The following examples are given: The high 
priest (anastas, having stood up) arose and said 
unto them," Matt. 26 : 62 ; " Peter (anastas, 
having stood up) arose in the midst of the dis- 
ciples and said," Acts 1:15; "Then Paul (ana- 
stas, having stood up) stood up and beckoning 
with his hand, said." Acts 13: 16. These ex- 
amples are sufficient to show to any considerate 



&0 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

reader that the use of this participle in the case 
of Paul's baptism indicates that the action of 
baptism followed immediately on his rising up 
and that it took place while he was in an erect 
posture. Was immersion ever performed in 
that way? Let us see how the Immersionist's 
definition of baptism, quoted in Chapter I, will 
fit the case — Ananias' command: " Having 
stood up, be dipped, once, backwards; " — Paul's 
compliance: " having stood up, he was dipped, 
once, backwards." 

Dr. Armstrong, in his most convenient and 
scholarly book, "The Sacraments of the New 
Testament," issued this year (1880), quotes the 
following from Dr. J. H. Rice : " According to 
the idiom of the Greek language, these two 
words do not make two different commands, as 
the English reader would suppose, when he read 
I, arise; 2, be baptized. But the participle 
(arise, literally, standing up) simply modifies the 
signification of the verb, or rather is used to 
complete the action of the verb, and, therefore, 
instead of warranting the opinion that Paul rose 
up, went out and was immersed, it definitely 
and precisely expresses his posture when he 
received baptism." 



BAPTISM OF PAUL. 8t 

And yet, in spite of such circumstances as 
are given by the sacred history, in the case of 
the baptism of the great apostle, we are re- 
quired to believe that immersion alone is bap- 
tism, the penalty of our incredulity being exclu- 
sion from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper 
by one party of the Immersionists, and exclu- 
sion from the salvation of -the Cross by the 
other. 



82 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER IX. 

CHRISTIAN BAPTISM CORNELIUS. 

The fifth case of Christian baptism was of 
Cornelius and his friends, in his house in Cae- 
sarea. 

" While Peter yet spake these words, the 
Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the 
word. And they of the circumcision which be- 
lieved were astonished, as many as came with 
Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was 
poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they 
heard them speak with tongues, and magnify 
God. Then answered Peter, Can any man for- 
bid water, that these should not be baptized, 
which have received the Holy Ghost as well as 
we? And he commanded them to be baptized 
in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they 
him to tarry certain days." — Acts 10:44-48. 

Was this a case of immersion or aspersion ? 
We think, the latter, clearly. 

First. They were in a house, and the only 
natural interpretation of the language is that 
the baptism took place upon the spot; without 
leaving the house. 



CORNELIUS AND OTHERS. 83 

Second. Immediately on their • receiving 
"the pouring out of the Holy Ghost," Peter, 
though not through with his discourse, said, 
" Can any man forbid water, that these should 
not be baptized ? " These words were spoken 
in the house, and they plainly involve the re- 
quest that the water should be brought in : cer- 
tainly not that they should go out in search of 
it, or to it. Dean Alford says, " The article 
should here certainly be expressed, Can any 
forbid the zvater to these who have received the 
Spirit? The expression 'forbid' used with 'the 
water' is interesting, as showing that the prac- 
tice was to bring the water to the candidate \ not 
the candidate to the water!' 

Third. Peter, in narrating this incident to 
his brethren, said : 

" And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost 
fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then 
remembered 1 the word of the Lord, how that 
he said, John indeed baptized with water ; but 
ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost." — 
Acts 11:15, 16. 

Here Peter tells us clearly that the falling of 
the Holy Ghost on those in Cornelius' house 



84 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

and on the apostles in the " upper room" in 
Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, — "on us at 
the beginning" — was baptism and that its coun- 
terpart is water baptism. The falling of the 
H0I3' Ghost on the people at once reminded 
him of the manner of John's baptism, and his 
pointed statement that it did so, settles the 
question of the mode of baptism practiced in 
this case, to the satisfaction of any one free from 
prejudice, and, as positively as so many words 
would do, declares John's baptism to have been 
by aspersion. And whoever claims that John's 
baptism was by immersion, takes issue with the 
inspired apostle, Peter. 

Peter preached in the house: before his dis- 
course was finished, the Holy Ghost was poured 
out upon Cornelius and others : Peter remem- 
bered that the Lord had said he would baptize 
with the Spirit as John baptized with water; he 
commanded water to be brought, and, accord- 
ingly, they were baptized in the house. This 
is the plain interpretation, and the only possible 
one, of this piece of sacred history. 






LYDIA — THE JAILER. 85 

CHAPTER X. 

CHRISTIAN BAPTISM LYDIA THE JAILER. 

The sixth case of Christian baptism was that 
of Lydia and her household, recorded at Acts 
16:13-15. The scene was by the side of a 
river, whither the apostles went, not for the 
convenience of baptizing, but because it was a 
place where "prayer was wont to be made." 
Lydia and other women resorted to the same 
spot for the purpose of prayer. Lydia gave 
attention to the things spoken by Paul and she 
and her household were at once baptized. 

There is nothing in this case which indicates 
the mode of the baptism, further than the 
fact, which is universal in the New Testament 
baptisms, that she received baptism immediate- 
ly on accepting Christ and on the spot. Being 
away from her house and not having expected 
baptism, she was not prepared with change of 
garments, which would be necessary in case of 
immersion, and there is no intimation given of 



86 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

any of the arrangements and delay necessary 
for immersion. It can hardly be supposed that 
the apostle would have omitted mention of 
these details, while giving others of no greater 
importance. 

From the above considerations, and there 
being nothing to the contrary, we conclude that 
this case was like the others and that, while 
Lydia and her household may have been bap- 
tized with the water of the river, they were not 
baptized in it : but that the water " fell* on 
them " as in the baptism of the Holy Ghost. 

THE JAILER AND HIS FAMILY. 

The seventh case is recorded as follows : 
" And they spake unto him the word 
of the Lord, and to all that were in the 
house. And he took them the same hour of 
the night, and washed their stripes; and was 
baptized, he and all his, straightway. And 
when he had brought them into his house, he 
set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in 
God with all his house." — Acts 16: 32-34. 

The circumstances detailed in this account, 
beginning at the 25th verse, plainly show that 
immersion was out of the question. Let the 



THE JAILER. 87 

reader examine the account for himself and de- 
cide whether or not immersion was possible. 
Among other things consider the following : 

First. The scene, including the baptism, 
took place at the hour of midnight. While the 
evangelist details apparently unimportant cir- 
cumstances, not a hint is given of leaving the 
jail and going in search of a place for immers- 
ing, which would hardly have escaped mention 
had it taken place, especially if at midnight. 

Second. The duty of the jailer was to keep 
prisoners "safely " and it was a violation of the 
law for him to allow them, under any circum- 
stances, outside the prison walls. To do so 
was, by the law, a forfeiture of his own life. It 
can scarcely be supposed that this jailer would 
have violated the law, under such circumstan- 
ces, by going out in company with the prison- 
ers even for baptism. The exacting character 
of the law and his respect for and fear of it, are 
indicated by his determination to take his own 
life when he discovered that the prison doors 
were open. 

Third. The baptism took place after their 
removal from "the inner prison/' where they 



88 - MODE OF BAPTISM. 

had been in stocks, and previous to their re- 
moval into the residence portion of the prison ; 
that is, in the " outer prison," or in that part of 
the prison where those were kept who were not 
" thrust into the inner prison and their feet 
made fast in stocks." Examine the Scripture 
narrative of the case and you will see that this 
is true. 

Fourth. Paul said, about in so many words, 
that they had not been out of the prison during 
the night. "When it was day" the magistrates 
sent word to the jailer to release Paul and Silas 
"privily." But Paul refused to go out "privily," 
and required that the magistrates should them- 
selves come and take them out, which they ac- 
cordingly did. Now, whoever supposes that 
the apostles had been out "privily" during the 
night, supposes them guilty of extraordinary 
and unpardonable duplicity in professing an 
unwillingness to go out " privily." 

EIGHTH AND NINTH CASES. 

There are two other instances of Christian 
baptism by the apostles: Acts 18:7, 8, and 
Acts 19: 1-5. In these cases there are no cir- 



EIGHTH AND NINTH CASES. 89 

cumstances which indicate the mode of admin- 
istration; except the absence of any information 
that they took place near to any pond or creek 
or that there was any delay or preparations for 
immersion. We are left, therefore, to infer that 
these baptisms were performed by the apostle 
Paul in the way that he himself was baptized 
and which is so strongly indicated in all the 
other cases as being the only way in which bap- 
tism was administered by the apostles. 

We have now gone through and examined all 
the cases of Christian baptism recorded in the 
Acts of the Apostles. We have found that in 
some of them immersion was out of the ques- 
tion : in others highly improbable ; and in not 
one of them do the circumstances point to im- 
mersion as the probable mode. The weight of 
evidence is overwhelmingly against the idea of 
immersion. It cannot be proven from the New 
Testament that the apostles ever immersed a 
single subject. Nor can it be proven that any 
one was ever immersed in the days of the apos- 
tles. We defy every Immersionist on earth to 
prove from Scripture that any person was ever 
immersed in the primitive Church, In addition 



90 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

to all other facts and arguments, the nature and 
design of Christian baptism prove that affusion 
or sprinkling was the mode. 

Mr. Kurtz pertinently inquires and remarks: 
" Were all the disciples instructed and con- 
verted by Paul near to some pond or creek? 
If so, how singular it is, that converts, in these 
and other cases, could not be found, unless, by 
a remarkable coincidence, a large body of wa- 
ter was near! If all the ponds and creeks, 
which exist in the imagination of Immersionists 
who interpret the Acts of the Apostles, had 
really watered Judea, then, it may be proved 
by calculation, that there was water enough to 
have turned the whole land into a sea." 

In the light of this survey of all the cases of 
Christian baptism in the New Testament, we 
commend to our readers the following catholic 
thoughts by Dr. Armstrong : " To require im- 
mersion in order to admission to the Church of 
God, is to infringe upon that ' liberty wherewith 
Christ hath made his people free/ and to 'teach 
for doctrine the commandments of men.' And 
to exclude from the Lord's table, the Lord's 
people, because they have not been immersed, 



EIGHTH AND NINTH CASES. 91 

is to bring upon the soul the guilt of the sin of 
schism." 

Alexander Campbell, in summing up his ar- 
guments in favor of immersion, mentions this 
one: "The places where this rite was admin- 
istered — in rivers and where there was much 
water." In this assertion there is a good deal 
of what is now-a-days familiarly called " cheek" 
not to use a word of worse meaning. Mr. 
Campbell knew that no river, nor much water, 
is mentioned in connection with any of the New 
Testament baptisms, John's only excepted. 
What will candid people think of a cause which 
must be propped up by such efforts to mislead 
the uninformed and credulous? 



92 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER XI. 

THE GREEK WORD BAPTIZO. 

A great amount of time and labor have been 
spent in trying to arrive at a correct definition 
of the word baptizo as used in the Septuagint 
and the New Testament. Writers have for this 
purpose gone to the writings of the ancient 
Greek authors and to the Greek lexicons. We 
propose a different course, on the principle that 
the Bible is the best intepreter of itself and is 
by far the best dictionary for a definition of a 
word used by the sacred writers. Does the 
New Testament define the meaning of baptizo 
as used therein? It certainly does, and plainly. 
Let us see : 

Here is the prediction, or word : 

" Ye (the apostles) shall be baptized with the 
Holy Ghost."— Acts i : 5. 

Let the reader bear in mind that all we are 
hunting just now is a clear definition of the 
Greek word baptizo. 

Here is the definition : 



THE GREEK WORD BAPTI20. 03 

"And there appeared unto them cloven 
tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of 
them. And they were all filled with the Holy 
Ghost." — Acts 2 : 3, 4. 

" The Holy Ghost fell on them, as on its at 
the beginning." — Acts 11:15. 

" On the Gentiles also was poured out the gift 
of the Holy Ghost." — Acts 10:45. 

"That they might receive the Holy Ghost : 
for as yet he had fallen on none of them." — - 
Acts 8: 15, 16. 

" The Holy Ghost fell on all them which 
heard the word." — Acts 10:44. 

"The Holy Ghost; which he shed on us 
abundantly." — Titus 3 : 6. 

From the above the reader will see that the 
infallible dictionary defines the word baptizo in 
the prediction or promise ', by the following 
words in the fulfillment: " fell on, poured out, 
shed on." Now who dare take issue with the 
infallible lexicon? And who needs to go to the 
Greek classics and lexicographers for a defini- 
tion of a Bible word when the Bible itself 
plainly furnishes it? 

Our Immersionist friends complain very much 



94 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

that the word baptizo is not translated, but is 
transferred from the Greek, simply. But this 
complaint comes back on them also, like Pyr- 
rhus' elephant, for when they get it changed to 
their notion, as they do in the book, which is 
the issue of the labors of the mouse of the 
American Bible Union, they have it immerse, 
which is only a transferred Latin word, as every 
scholar knows. It is immersum anglicized. And 
the elephant bears down hardest on the return 
trip, for baptize has been in use in the English 
language hundreds of years longer than im- 
merse. Baptize appears in the Geneva Bible, 
translated in 1557: in Cranmer's Bible, 1539: in 
Tyndale's Bible, 1534; and in Wickliff's transla- 
tion in 1380. Immerse appears first in the Eng- 
lish language in the writings of Lord Bacon, 
who was born in 1 561 ! So baptize is the older 
English word by more than 181 years! Ac- 
cording to Immersionists, English lexicograph- 
ers cannot define baptize , because baptize is an 
anglicized Greek word. But English lexico- 
graphers can define immerse, although immerse 
is an anglicized Latin word, which has been in 
the language centuries less time than baptize ! 



THE GREEK WORD BAPTIZO. 95 

Sample of reason: Johnson says "to baptize 
is to sprinkle," and Webster defines baptism to 
be "the application of water to the person." 
There is where the shoe pinches ! 

This is a suitable place to introduce what 
Peter Edwards, the author, called "a case" and 
modestly presented in his pointed little book 
published in 1841 : 

" Before I enter on the Mode of Baptism, I 
would take the liberty of proposing to my Bap- 
tist friends a plain case ; not so much a case of 
conscience as a case of criticism. That on 
which this case is founded is as follows: It is 
well known that under the present dispensation 
there are two instituted ordinances; the one in 
Scripture is expressed by the term deipnon, a 
supper, the other by baptisma, baptism. The 
proper and obvious meaning of deipnon is a 
feast or a common meal, Mark 6:21; the proper 
meaning of baptism a is said to be the immersion 
of the whole body. The case then is this: 

"If, because the proper meaning of the term 
baptisma, baptism, is the immersion of the whole 
body, a person, who is not immersed, cannot be 
said to have been baptized, since nothing short 
of immersion amounts to the full import of the 
word baptism. If this be true, I should be 
glad to know that as deipnon, a supper, properly 



g6 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

means a feast or common meal, whether a per- 
son who, in. the use of that ordinance, takes only 
a piece of bread of half an inch square, and 
drinks a table-spoonful of wine, which is neither 
a feast nor a common meal, and so does not 
come up to the proper meaning of the word, 
can be said to have received the Lord's sup- 
per." 

Mr. Edwards modestly called the above " a 
case : " we name it a poser. 

We also favor the reader with the following 
from Dr. Guthrie's Pedobaptist's Guide : 
"the syriac rendering of 'baptizo.' 

"One of the strongest conceivable arguments 
in favor of our view of ' baptizo ' is to be found 
in a particular usage to which, as yet, I have 
made no allusion. We are apt unreflectingly 
to assume, from its occurrence in the original 
Greek of the four Gospels, that i baptizo ' was 
the identical word used by John the Baptist and 
our Lord. But very clearly it was not; for the 
language at that time spoken in Palestine was 
a modification of the ancient Hebrew, closely 
resembling the Syriac. Now the oldest version 
of the New Testament is the Syriac, which is 
believed to have been made in the first century. 
It is therefore in the highest degree probable 
that the Syriac translators would employ the 



SYRIAC RENDERING OF BAPTIZO. 97 

very term to denote baptism which had been 
employed by John the Baptist, Christ, and the 
Apostles, in their vernacular Syro-Chaldaic, 
and which would be well known throughout 
Palestine and the adjacent provinces of Syria. 
What word, then, do the Syriac translators em- 
ploy? A word meaning to dip? No. The 
Syriac, of course, has such a word : but never 
once in that venerable version is it used to de- 
note baptism. Instead of it, the word used is 
the verb ' to stand/ in the Aphel, or causative 
conjugation (corresponding to the Hiphel in 
Hebrew); so that the Syriac— and therefore 
probably the original- — word 'to baptize 1 means 
literally and primarily 'to cause or make stand.' 
However this may be explained, it goes direct- 
ly against the Immersionist. If it is to be ex- 
plained modally, it will prove that the mode of 
baptism was not to immerse the subject, but to 
make him stand (as is represented in ancient 
pictures), and have the baptismal element 
poured on his head. In this case, we may dis- 
cern a peculiar significance in the words of the 
Syrian disciple Ananias, when he said to Paul, 
Arise, and be baptized.' If it is to be ex- 
plained more generally in the sense of 'consti- 
tuting/ 'confirming,' or conferring a recognized 
standing, it is no less fatal to the Immersionist 
theory; for then it is a generic term, without 
reference to mode, which the Syriac translators 



98 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

(after the inspired men whose word we assume 
it probable they adopted) did not deem it of 
the slightest consequence to indicate. This is 
an argument not much used in the Baptismal 
controversy, as popularly conducted ; but it is 
one whose force will appear the more it is pon- 
dered, and which the Immersionist will find it a 
hard task to explain away." 

Of the Syriac version Calmet's Dictionary 
says: " In the third century it already was the 
authoritative version of the Church." Being 
the oldest translation of the New Testament in 
the world, it is an important witness, and one 
to which Immersionists cannot object, for it was 
made in the first century, when, if their exclu- 
sive views are correct, immersion was univer- 
sally praticed as the only Christian baptism. 
We quote again; this time from Dr. N. L. Rice : 

" 1st. It is a remarkable fact, that the pri- 
mary meaning of the word amad y which is uni- 
formly employed in the Syriac version to trans- 
late baptizo, is to stand, and then to cause to 
stand, or confirm. This is the meaning of the 
word in Hebrew, Chaldaic and Arabic, which 
are very near of kin of the Syriac. The Lexi- 
cons all give the word this derivation. ' It is 
hardly credible,' says Professor Stuart, 'that the 
Syriac word could vary so much from all these 



SYRIAC RENDERING OF BAPTIZO. 99 

languages, as properly to mean immerse, dip." 
" 2d. Besides, the Syriac has a word (tsevd) 
which properly means to dip or plunge ; and 
this word is used in every case in the New Tes- 
tament, where the idea of dipping occurs. But 
it is not used in translating baptize How 
shall we account for the fact, that instead of 
using the word signifying to immerse, in trans- 
lating baptizo, the Syriac translator uniformly 
employs a word meaning to confirm? 

" Now, then, when we remember, that the 
Syriac has a word which signifies properly to 
dip, how shall we account for the fact that the 
translator rendered baptizo by a word meaning 
to confirm, to purify, to enlighten, and which 
does not express mode ? It will not be pre- 
tended that he was swayed by Pedobaptist in- 
fluence; since if our Immersionist friends are in 
the right, there were then no Pedobaptists in 
the world. Most evidently, the Syriac trans- 
lator did not understand baptizo as meaning to 
immerse, or he would have chosen a Syriac 
word which has this meaning." 

When, therefore, we are required to be im- 
mersed or else be pronounced unbaptized, we 
simply reply, that there is no warrant in Scrip- 
ture for such ritual dogmatism: nor have Im- 
mersionists all the authority and knowledge 
there is in the whole of Greekdom. 



IOO MODE OF BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER XII. 

DESIGN AND USE OF BAPTISM. 

There are two essential facts in the history 
of salvation, viz : The work of the eternal Son, 
and the work of the eternal Spirit — the death 
of Christ as an atonement for sin, and the ap- 
plication of the merits of his death in the puri- 
fication or regeneration of the human heart. 
Both of these works are essential to salvation 
and nothing else is essential. 

Both these essential facts have ever been 
represented by types. In the New Testament 
there are two sacraments : the Lord's supper 
and baptism. One of these represents the first 
and the other the second of these facts. The 
Lord's supper is to stand perpetually as an em- 
blem of the death of Christ, and baptism as an 
emblem of the purification of the human heart. 
Now, whoever claims that baptism represents 
the " death, burial and resurrection of Christ/' 
makes both the sacraments represent one of 
the essential facts and leaves the other without 
representation. 



DESIGN AND USE OF BAPTISM. IOI 

The uses of baptism may be enumerated as 
follows : 

1. It is a sacrament or oath of fidelity. We 
take it in arranging ourselves on the side of 
Christ. It binds its subjects to an obligation 
of fidelity to God. 

2. It is a mark of religious distinction. The 
Jews were distinguished from the Gentiles by 
circumcision. The Christians, or subjects of 
baptism, are by it distinguished and separated 
from the general mass of irreligious men. 

3. It is a sign of spiritual blessings. In rep- 
resenting primarily the work of the Holy Ghost 
in regenerating the heart, it generically signifies 
the whole work of grace in the soul, — pardon, 
regeneration, sanctification, etc. : in short the 
whole work of salvation as carried forward in 
the soul and consummated by the Holy Ghost. 

4. It is the seal of the new covenant. God 
has always affixed a seal ox. token to his cov- 
enants. Circumcision was the seal of the old 
covenant, " a token of the covenant" between 
God and Abraham. The gospel is the Abra- 
hamic covenant completely developed, and 
comprehends all nations and extends through 



102 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

all time. What circumcision was under the old, 
baptism is under the new dispensation: — a seal 
of the covenant of salvation which God has gra- 
ciously made with man. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS. 

I. Let us admit, for argument, that baptizo, 
in classic use, means to immerse, which cannot 
be shown, and also allow the Immersionists' 
claim that, therefore, it ought to be translated 
immerse everywhere in Scripture. A rule which 
is good in one case is good in every parallel 
one. Now let us try this rule on a parallel case : 
Circumcision is a word which means in the 
Greek " to cut round. " It came to the English 
through Rome and there got a Latin form and 
is a transferred word. The same rule which re- 
quires that baptism, according to the Immer- 
sionists' claim, be translated immerse, requires 
that circumcision be translated cutting around. 

Now let us see them try it on a few passages : 
" In whom also ye are cut around with the ait- 
ti/ijr around made without hands : " — " For we 
are the cutting around which worship God in the 
Spirit : " — " And cutting around is that of the 



CONCLUDING REMARKS. IO3 

heart" The translation theory will not work. 

2. At the memorable time of the passage of 
the Red Sea, there was, according to Scrip- 
ture, one baptism and one immersion. Of the 
baptism the Isaelites were the subjects, (see 
1 Cor. 10: 1, 2): "All our fathers were under the 
cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were 
all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the 
sea." And according to Moses their baptism 
took place on "dry ground," (see Ex. 14: 29): 
" But the children of Israel walked upon dry 
land in the midst of the sea; and the waters 
were a wall unto them on their right hand, and 
on their left;" and according to David it was 
by "pouring out" the water, (see Psalm jj\ 
17): "The clouds poured out water." Of the 
immersion the Egyptians were the subjects, 
(see Ex. 14:28): "And the waters returned, 
and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, 
and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the 
sea after them ; there remained not so much as 
one of them." 

Here then, by the express testimony of Scrip- 
ture, we are taught that baptism is one thing and 
immersion another. The baptism of the one 



104 MODE OF BAPTISM. 

party consisted in their escaping the immersion, 
and the party immersed was the one that was 
not baptized: But " Israel (the baptized party) 
saw the Egyptians (the immersed party) dead 
upon the sea-shore." 

In conclusion, I will say to the patient reader, 
that I have endeavored to be as concise as pos- 
sible. What I have given are only samples of 
the arguments which may be produced to show 
that the Scriptural mode of water baptism is the 
same as the Scriptural mode of Spiritual bap- 
tism, viz: the falling of the element on the subject 
Very many of the arguments have not been so 
much as mentioned in these few pages. For 
them the reader must seek larger books. 

If I have succeeded in undeceiving one indi- 
vidual, who stood in danger of being misled by 
unfounded, though confident, assertions, I am 
amply paid for the labor of writing. I confi- 
dently commit this book to the care of the Great 
Head of the Church, praying, that he will par- 
don whatever in it is human, and bless whatever 
is agreeable to his will to the firm and happy 
establishment of the reader in " the faith once 
delivered to the saints." 



S 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Sept. 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 
111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



